Archaeological Report - Roevehagh 2, Co. Galway (Ireland)

Issue 8 [ISSN 2009-2237]

Archaeological Excavation ReportE4012 - Roevehagh 2, Co. Galway

Tenant Farm

Eachtra Journal

October 2010

Final Archaeological Excavation Report

Co. Galway

Galway County Council and National Roads Authority

Enda O’Mahony & Finn Delaney

Roevehagh 2

EACHTRAArchaeological Projects

E No:

:

Project:

Client:

Date:

E4012

N18 Oranmore to Gort

Enda O'MahonyExcavation Director

Written by:

Tenant Farm

CORKThe Forge, Innishannon, Co. Cork

tel: 021 4701616 | web: www.eachtra.ie | email: [email protected]

GALWAY Unit 10, Kilkerrin Park, Liosbain Industrial Estate, Galway

tel: 091 763673 | web: www.eachtra.ie | email: [email protected]

Final Archaeological Excavation Report

Roevehagh 2Co. Galway

Excavation Director

Enda O'Mahony

Written By

Enda O’Mahony & Finn Delaney

EACHTRAArchaeological Projects

© Eachtra Archaeological Projects 2010 The Forge, Innishannon, Co Cork

Set in 12pt Garamond

Printed in Ireland

i

Table of ContentsSummary�� v

Acknowledgements�� vi

1 Introduction�� 1Background�to�the�scheme�� 1

Circumstances�of�discovery�� 1

Brief�� 3

Location�� 3

Geology/Landscape�� 3

Site�clearance�� 4

Survey�� 4

2 Methodology–research�� 8The�National�Inventory�of�Architectural�Heritage�� 8

Record�of�Monuments�and�Places�for�Co��Galway�� 8

Irish�Wills�Index�1484–1858�� 8

Burial�Records�of�Galway�and�Mayo�pre-1901�� 9

Griffith�Valuation�–�‘Primary�Valuation�of�Tenements’�1857�� 9

Cartographic�sources�� 9

Written�sources�� 9

3 Archaeologicalandhistoricalbackground�� 11Vernacular�architecture�� 11

Clachans�� 11

Congested�district�boards��14

The�Clanricarde�Estate��14

Concannon�family��15

The�Thorngate�family��15

Griffith�valuation�of�tenements��15

4 Cartographicanalysis�� 17First�edition�Ordnance�Survey�map�1838��17

Griffith�Valuation�map�1857��17

25�inch�Ordnance�Survey�map�1895��18

Second�edition�Ordnance�Survey�map�1929��18

Cartographic�summary��18

5 Description�� 21Structure�1��21

Structure�2��25

ii

Structure�3��27

6 Excavation��30Trench�1��30

Trench�2��30

Trench�3��30

Trench�4��31

Trench�5��32

7 Conclusions��34

8 References��36

iii

List of FiguresFigure1: Sitelocationmapbasedontheordnancesurveydiscoveryseries�� 2

Figure2: FirsteditionordnancesurveysixinchseriesCo�Galway(sheet103)–1838�� 6

Figure3: 25inchordnancesurveyseriesforCo�Galway(sheet103:04)–1895�� 7

Figure4: SecondeditionordnancesurveysixinchseriesCo�Galway(sheet103)–1929�� 12

Figure5: PlanshowingtherelationshipbetweenStructure3andStructure1and2�� 13

Figure6: DGPSsurveyofthefieldsystems�� 19

Figure7: PlanofStructure1and2alsoshowingthelocationoftheexcavatedtrenches��22

Figure8: PlanofStructure3alsoshowingthelocationoftheexcavatedtrenches��28

List of PlatesPlate1: Lookingwestatthestoneknownlocallyasthe‘Cuckoorock’�� 4

Plate2: LookingnorthatthesouthernsidewallofStructure1withthewesternhalfofStructure2visibleinthebackground��20

Plate3: LookingsouthatthesoutherndoorwayinStructure1��22

Plate4: LookingeastatthewesterngablewallofStructure1�Theoriginalwallhasbeenreplacedbyfieldclearancestonetowardsthecentreofthewall��23

Plate5: Lookingwestatthefieldclearancecairnandflue-likefeatureintheinteriorofStructure1��23

Plate6: LookingatthewesternwallofStructure2�Notetheblockedupwindowope��24

Plate7: LookingtowardsthesouthwestcornerofStructure2�Notetherubblecoveringthelineofthenonextanteasternwall��25

Plate8: LookingnorthatStructure3whichisbuiltintothegroundonitswesternside��25

Plate9: Lookingnorthatthethresholdstones inthesoutherndoorwayofStructure3whichwererevealedintrench4��26

Plate10: Lookingwestacrosstrench1whichwaslocatedagainstthesoutherndoorwayand the flue-like features set into the site clearance cairn on the interior ofStructure1��29

Plate11: Lookingsouthacrosstrench3whichrevealedthenortherndoorwayinStructure1��29

Plate13: Lookingeastalongtrench3whichwasexcavatedfromtheinteriorfaceofthewesternwallofStructure2andacrosstheremainsoftheeasternwall��30

Plate12: Lookingnorthacrosstrench5whichrevealedthenortherndoorwayofStructure3��30

iv

Roevehagh 2-e4012 http://eachtra.ie/index.php/journal/e4012-roevehagh2-co-galway/

v

SummaryThis report analyses the individual structures and researches the historical and social background of a small group of buildings in Roevehagh townland which were subject to survey and test excavations. The group included a pair of buildings and a single, similar building, located c. 45 m to the north. This building group appears to represent two pre-famine farming households likely to have been constructed by a group of tenant farmers at Roevehagh. It is likely to have been abandoned prior to the Great Famine 1845–49. Structure 1 is depicted on the 1838 OS map and is partly depicted on the 1895 OS map. It is depicted only as a small outline, indicating that it is roofless on the 1929 OS map. These buildings probably went out of use after the earlier 19th century village of Roevehagh was established, as a response to changes in the socio-economic structures in Galway.

Townland RoevehaghParish KilleelyBarony DunkellinCounty GalwayMinisterial Order Number A045E Number E4012Ordnance Survey Map Sheet GA95National Grid Reference 144577, 219646/ 144585,

219181Elevation 19.5Site Type Clachan

iSSUe 8: eachtRa JoURnal - iSSn 2009-2237 Final aRchaeological excavation RepoRt

vi

AcknowledgementsThe excavation director was Enda O’Mahony. The field crew included Finn Delaney and John Twomey. Illustrations are by Enda O’Mahony and the historical research was un-dertaken by Alison McQueen. Joseph O’Brien was the resident engineer for consult-ant engineers Hyder Tobin. The project was commissioned by Galway County Council and was funded by the National Roads Authority. The Project Archaeologist was Jerry O’Sullivan.


1

1 IntroductionThis report outlines the results of an archaeological survey and excavation in Roevehagh townland Co. Galway at the site of the overgrown remains of three structures and associ-ated field boundaries (Fig 1). The structures and field boundaries were identified during scrub clearance by machine across areas covered in hazel and blackthorn and underlain by limestone bedrock. The scrub clearance was undertaken within the lands acquired for the N18 Gort to Oranmore road scheme. The archaeological investigations were undertaken under a registration number (E4012) for construction/site clearance monitoring from the Department of the Environment Heritage and Local Government.

Background to the schemeThe N18 Oranmore to Gort (Glenbrack to Rathmorrissey) national road scheme was approved by An Bórd Pleanála on 7th June 2007. The development will consist of approxi-mately 27.2 km of dual carriageway, and all associated works. The area of archaeological investigations lies within the footprint of the proposed scheme as defined by the Compul-sory Purchase Order (CPO) published by Galway County Council on 1st August 2006. Eachtra Archaeological Projects was commissioned by Galway County Council and the National Roads Authority to undertake Phase 1 archaeological testing and Phase 2 exca-vation of sites directly impacted by the proposed development. Phase 3 post excavation works are currently in progress.

The phase 4 archaeological monitoring work was commissioned by Galway County Council, sponsored by the National Roads Authority and will be supervised for Galway County Council by Hyder Tobin with archaeological supervision by the NRA Project Archaeologist Jerry O’ Sullivan. It was felt necessary to monitor topsoil stripping and/or site clearance by the main contractor for the construction of the scheme or any con-tractors appointed for this work by Galway County Council in areas where no previous archaeological investigations have been conducted.

Circumstances of discoveryDuring site clearance work at Roevehagh (CH 9450 – 9000, NGR 144577, 219646 / 144585, 219181) in an area which was excluded from earlier archaeological investigations due to the overgrown nature of the ground and the protruding karstic limestone bedrock a number of structures and field boundaries were identified. The machine drivers and engineers noted that while hazel trees predominated across the protruding limestone bed-rock in the hollows where pockets of dark brown topsoil were present blackthorn trees predominated. The structures were identified in two of these natural hollows. The struc-tures and the scrub and trees in their immediate surroundings and the field boundaries were left standing and untouched by the site clearance operators.

135000

135000

142500

142500

150000

150000

203200

203200

214400

214400

225600

225600

¢0 5 10

Kilometres

Ballinillaun 1E3888

Ballinillaun 1E3888

Roevehagh 1E3885

Roevehagh 1E3885

Roevehagh 2Roevehagh 2

Caherweelder 7E3826

Caherweelder 7E3826

Derrydonnell MoreE3867

Derrydonnell MoreE3867

Moyveela 3E3907

Moyveela 3E3907Moyveela 2

E3884Moyveela 2

E3884

ColdwoodE3887

ColdwoodE3887

Moyveela 1E3883

Moyveela 1E3883Ballinillaun 2

E3886Ballinillaun 2

E3886

LavallyE3869LavallyE3869

Caherweelder 6E3871

Caherweelder 6E3871

Caherweelder 5E3866

Caherweelder 5E3866Caherweelder 4

E3708Caherweelder 4

E3708

Caherweelder 3E3889

Caherweelder 3E3889

Caherweelder 1E3880

Caherweelder 1E3880

Caherweelder 2E3890

Caherweelder 2E3890

OwenbristyE3770

OwenbristyE3770

Drumharsna NorthE3868

Drumharsna NorthE3868

Drumharsna SouthE3872

Drumharsna SouthE3872

Cullenagh MoreE3881

Cullenagh MoreE3881

Ballyglass WestE3870

Ballyglass WestE3870

CPO line Excavation Areas

Roevehagh 2E4012

Roevehagh 2E4012


2

Figure1: Sitelocationmapbasedontheordnancesurveydiscoveryseries�


3

BriefThe area was inspected by Jerry O’Sullivan, the NRA Project Archaeologist, who subse-quently produced a brief, outlining the proposed mitigation measures to be undertaken by Eachtra Archaeological Projects at the site of the structures and the associated field boundaries.

Manual site clearance of all scrub, trees and overgrowth within, and in, the vicinity of the buildings was proposed. A survey of the buildings, to include detailed descriptions, ground plans and a full photographic record, was to be undertaken. The excavation of a number of test trenches (a minimum of three 1m x 1m trenches per building) within the buildings was also proposed in order to retrieve dating evidence in the form of an artefac-tual assemblage for the construction and use of the buildings. To this end, the excavated material was to be sieved in order to identify small finds. A topographic survey of the field systems, road boundaries and building footprints was also proposed along with an illustrated report detailing the results of all of the investigations.

Location The identified buildings were located within the CPO (NGR 144577, 219646 / 144585, 219181) (Fig 1) for the route of the N18 Oranmore to Gort Road scheme within the town-land of Roevehagh. Roevehagh is located in the Barony of Kiltartan, in County Galway. The buildings are located on the southern slopes of a low, gradually rising, hill which overlooks the flood plain of the Dunkellin river to the south. A small tertiary road, which runs parallel to the present N18 road. runs north/south approximately 500 m to the west of the buildings. St Colmans Catholic Church is located on the eastern side of the road and to the north west of the buildings. The townland of Fahymactibbot lies just to the east. The buildings were accessed from a small farm trackway which winds eastwards from the tertiary road.

Geology/LandscapeThe underlying geology in the surrounding area is Carboniferous limestone of the Bur-ren and Tubber formations bordered by Namurian shales and sandstones to the west in Clare and Devonian old red sandstone to the east in the Slieve Aughty uplands. Glacial till overlies the bedrock to varying depths (0–5 m) and the soils derived from the till are generally shallow brown earths. The topsoils are characteristically thin and dry but, en-riched by the limestone parent material, support moderately good grass pastures. There are boulder fields and expanses of bedrock exposure typical of karst limestone country.

The buildings in Roevehagh are located within one of these areas of limestone pave-ment. However, the buildings themselves are located in shallow hollows which contain some topsoil. The limestone pavement is overgrown by hazel and blackthorn trees which, prior to the site clearance, formed an impenetrable and dense barrier. A massive limestone boulder to the west of the building group stands proud of the surrounding limestone


4

pavement and can only be the result of deposition by glacial forces (Plate 1). The boulder is known locally as the ‘Cuckoo rock’. The land to the south of the buildings outside the limestone pavement is made up of good grassland used mainly for pasture though mixed agriculture including tillage for cash and fodder crops would have been more common until recent decades.

Site clearance The areas around the three structures were covered in dense scrub with numerous large blackthorn trees growing within and around the structures. Low scrub filled the areas between the trees leaving the interior of the structures in a nearly impenetrable state. In addition thick stumps of ivy covered the stone walls of the buildings. All this scrub and tree growth was removed using hand tools such as bush saws, loppers and secateurs. The clearance itself revealed most of the buildings structure and Building 2 was identified once the tree growth and ivy had been cleared.

Survey The surrounding field systems which sub-divided the limestone pavement and which had been cleared of overgrowth by machine were surveyed. A DGPS system, which consisted of a base station and a rover, were used to complete the survey. The accuracy of the DGPS system was 25 mm on both the X and Y planes and 100 mm on the Z plane. The field boundaries recorded by the survey match the field boundaries marked on the Ordnance

Plate1: Lookingwestatthestoneknownlocallyasthe‘Cuckoorock’�


5

Survey maps (Figs 2, 3, 4 and 5). The regular strip fields shown on the 25 inch ordnance survey map were identified and those surveyed correspond exactly with the Ordnance Survey mapping (Fig 3). The curving boundaries which underlie the regular strip pattern were also surveyed and correspond precisely with the boundaries marked on the first edi-tion ordnance survey mapping (Fig 2).

RO

EV

EH

AG

H

CA

HE

RA

PH

EEP

A

FAH

YM

AC

TIB

BO

T

CA

STL

EG

AR

1442

54

1442

54

1450

54

1450

54

219066

219066

219546

219546

Roe

veh

agh

2R

oeve

hag

h 2

Roe

veh

agh

2R

oeve

hag

h 2

025

050

0M

etre

sC

PO

line

Surv

eyed

stru

cutre

sSu

rvey

ed fi

eld

boun

darie

s¢


6

Figu

re2

:Fi

rste

ditio

nor

dnan

ces

urve

ysi

xin

chs

erie

sCo

�Gal

way

(she

et1

03)–

183

8�

1443

29

1443

29

1449

49

1449

49

219053

219053

219413

219413

Roe

veh

agh

2R

oeve

hag

h 2

Roe

veh

agh

2R

oeve

hag

h 2

025

050

0M

etre

sC

PO

line

Surv

eyed

fiel

d bo

unda

ries

Surv

eyed

stru

cutre

s¢


7

Figu

re3

:25

inch

ord

nanc

esu

rvey

ser

ies

forC

o�G

alw

ay(s

heet

103

:04)

–1

895�


8

2 Methodology – researchThe site-specific research consisted of a document search of the following resources for Co. Galway:• National Inventory of Architectural Heritage• Record of Monuments and Places of County Galway 1998• Irish Wills Index 1484–1858• Burial Records of Galway and Mayo pre-1901• Griffith Valuation – ‘Primary Valuation of Tenements’ 1857• Cartographic and written sources

The National Inventory of Architectural HeritageThe National Inventory of Architectural Heritage (NIAH) records a representative sam-ple of buildings and structures of architectural importance on a county by county basis. Inclusion in the NIAH does not automatically afford statutory protection, but does high-light the importance of these structures in terms of their architectural and built heritage value. At present there is an NIAH produced for 20 complete counties in Ireland and also north Cork, east Cork and one each for Cork and Limerick Cities. The Phase 3 field-work for the NIAH for County Galway is currently being undertaken in 2009 and will produce the subsequent published inventory. In addition to the publications, the NIAH information can also be consulted online. Although the Phase 3 architectural survey has not yet been published for Galway, the Survey of Historic Gardens and Designed Land-scapes can be viewed online for Galway.

Record of Monuments and Places for Co. Galway The Record of Monuments and Places is a list of archaeological sites whose precise location is known by the National Monuments Section of the Department of the Environment Heritage and Local Government (DEHLG). These archaeological sites can also include items of built heritage, such as medieval and post-medieval structures. The post-medieval period generally applies to sites which are post-1700s in date and can include items such as bridges, vernacular dwellings and period style country house. Files relating to these known sites are available for consultation in the Sites and Monuments Record, which pro-vides detail of documentary sources and field inspections where these have taken place.

Irish Wills Index 1484–1858The Irish Wills Index (1484–1858) is preserved in the National Archives of Ireland. The main records (not the indexes) were sent to the Principal Registry in the Four Courts, Dublin after 1858, where they were destroyed by a fire in 1922 (Byrne 2004, 327). For-tunately, extracts from wills were compiled in the 19th century by Sir William Betham and an extensive collection of wills have also been assembled by the National Archives,


9

courtesy of solicitors’ offices throughout the state (ibid). There was no relevant informa-tion recovered for the Thorngate family.

Burial Records of Galway and Mayo pre-1901The burial records for Memorials Galway and Mayo were researched for the Browne and Vandeleur families. These burial records are limited and contain only 8,400 names cover-ing the years from the mid-19th to the early 20th century. There were no burial records recovered that were relevant to the study.

Griffith Valuation – ‘Primary Valuation of Tenements’ 1857Griffith’s Valuation is technically known as the Primary Valuation of Tenements and was completed in Ireland under the direction of Richard Griffith between 1847 and 1864. This nationwide survey was undertaken to assess payment of various local taxes by the people of Ireland. Tax was calculated based on the value of property occupied (Byrne 2004, 140). These records are important as the 19th century census in Ireland is thought to have been destroyed when the Public Records Office was burnt down in 1922. The Griffith Valuation is therefore a census substitute for mid-19th century Ireland in the years between the Great Famine and the beginning of civil registration in 1864. Griffith’s Valuation of County Galway was undertaken in 1856 and published in 1857.

Cartographic sourcesThe list of maps consulted are as follows:

• Taylor and Skinner’s road maps 1783• Ordnance Survey first edition six-inch map 1838• Ordnance Survey twenty-five inch map 1895• Ordnance Survey second edition six-inch map 1929• Record of Monuments and Places Map (Reduced Ordnance Survey six-inch sec-

ond edition)

Written sources The Ordnance Survey Name Books were written in tandem with the survey for the first edition six inch maps of 1841–2 (engraved 1844). They provide information about town-land names and other named features of architectural, archaeological and topographical importance, which appear on the first edition maps. The detail given on each subject ap-pears to depend very much upon the recorders interest.

The Ordnance Survey Name books, Ordnance Survey Letters and Ordnance Survey Memoirs are three separate books that deal with similar subjects with a variation in de-tail. The Ordnance Survey Letters give information on archaeological sites, local facts of interest and the weather but they are somewhat less detailed for the counties that were


10

surveyed last. The Memoirs are similar to the letters but sometimes have more detailed information. The Memoirs only exist for some counties as the rest were destroyed in the Four Courts during the Civil War. The entries are arranged by parish in all three books and in alphabetical order of each townland therein.


11

3 Archaeological and historical backgroundThe townland name Roevehagh probably derives from the Irish Ruadh bheiteach or ‘red birch’(O’Sullivan 2006). It is possible that the name may refer to an early medieval as-sembly site of the Ui Fhiacrach Aidhne that was marked by a bile or sacred tree enclosed by a cashel wall. Local tradition places the site of the bile and its cashel to the east of the present Catholic church at Roevehagh (Fitzpatrick 2001). The possible medieval assembly site is marked (GA103:170) on the maps accompanying the record of monuments and places and is listed as a hill top enclosure and is likely to be an ancient settlement enclo-sure or defensive site (Fig 4). The adjacent townland name Fahymactibbot derives from the Irish Faithche Mhic Tiobóid which can be directly translated as ‘green of the son of Theobold (Joyce 1869–1913).

Vernacular architectureVernacular buildings are defined as being built without the assistance of an architect and nearly always of locally found material. The buildings are usually built by the owner and do not require the services of specialized crafts people. The buildings therefore vary wide-ly, in detail, depending on the materials and levels of skill available locally (McAfee 1998). Irish vernacular buildings utilized simple proportions with an almost classical restraint and were also well integrated into their environment. Western vernacular house styles can be described as stone built, direct entry, with gable-ended hearths. This house form has developed from long houses or byre dwellings which were widespread in the west until the nineteenth century. The expulsion of cattle and the division of the house into different rooms are recent events. In older houses the kitchen characteristically possesses two doors immediately opposite each other with the fire on the floor at a distance from the opposite gable wall. This would have been a useful arrangement for the regulation of draughts and smoke from the turf fire but it was probably also linked to the habit of accommodating livestock and people together in the same house. It has also been suggested that the long house evolved from older house plans with circular or oval plans and the rounded ends and roofs on some extant buildings are an expression of this development. Rounded end wall and hipped roofs were common features of houses in Connacht although few exam-ples survive today (Aalen 1997).

ClachansThe clachan and rundale system of rural settlement allowed for the transformation of the west of Ireland into a thickly settled small farm area. ‘A clachan was a nucleated group of farmhouses where land-holding was organized communally, frequently on a townland basis and often with considerable ties of kinship between the families involved’ (Aalen 1997).

While the houses might have adjacent individual vegetable gardens (garrai), they were surrounded by a permanently cultivated infield - a large open field with a multiplicity of

Dun

kelli

n (R

iver

)

1441

40

1441

40

1451

60

1451

60

218991

218991

219591

219591

Roe

veh

agh

2R

oeve

hag

h 2

Roe

veh

agh

2R

oeve

hag

h 2

Surv

eyed

fiel

d bo

unda

ries

Surv

eyed

stru

cutre

sC

PO

line

CA

STLE

CH

UR

CH

ENC

LOSU

RE

RIN

GFO

RT

SOU

TER

RA

IN

¢0

250

500

Met

ers


12

Figu

re4

:Se

cond

edi

tion

ordn

ance

sur

vey

six

inch

ser

ies

Co�G

alw

ay(s

heet

103

)–1

929�

144578

144578

144629

144629

2192

69

2192

69

2193

49

2193

49

Structure 1

Structure 2

Structure 3

Field boundary

Trench

CPO line0 30 m

±


13

Figure5: PlanshowingtherelationshipbetweenStructure3andStructure1and2�


14

‘strips’ separated by sods or stones, in which oats and potatoes were grown. Outside the infield, and generally separated from it by a sturdy wall, was the outfield - poorer, more marginal, hilly or boggy ground, which was used for common pasture and turbary. These clusters of farm houses were not classic villages, in that they lacked any service functions - church, pub, school, shop. This type of settlement became practically universal on the poorer lands of the west of Ireland in the pre-Famine period (Whelan 1995).

The rundale system was a sophisticated response to specific ecological and social prob-lems which maximized the carrying capacity of a meager environment in an expanding demographic regime. They were well judged adaptations to the interface between limited arable and extensive non arable land (Aalen 1997).

Congested district boardsThe congested district boards during the second half of the nineteenth century complete-ly remodeled whole landscapes. The boards, continuing the tradition of landlord reform, encouraged the dispersion of farms rather then the clachan system. Whole areas were reorganized into consolidated striped holdings. A modern landscape of regular enclosed fields and compact dispersed farms was superimposed on the earlier system and this can be clearly seen at Roevehagh.

The Clanricarde EstateThe structures at Roevehagh are located within 1 km to north-east of the Marquis of Clanricardes Castle (RMP GA103–103), as it is named and depicted on the 1838 Ord-nance Survey map, in the neighbouring townland of Castlegar. As there does not appear to be an estate house attached to Roevehagh, it is most likely that it formed part of the Clanricarde estate which was one of the largest in county Galway. The Clanricarde estate is associated with the surnames, De Burgo/Burgh/Burke (early 16th century-1824) and laterally Canning De Burgh and De Burgh-Canning (1825–1915).

Official Peerage was granted to the Burke family by Henry VIII (1509–1547) when they received the title of Earl of Clanricarde in the early 16th century. Richard De Burgo, the 4th Earl of Clanricarde (c. 1566–1635) built Portumna Castle, where the family resided from 1618–1826. The castle went on fire in 1826 and was replaced by a second house near-by. Ulick De Burgo, the son of Richard De Burgo was created Marquis of Clanricarde in 1644 for his role in the Irish rebellion of 1641. The De Burgo name evolved to De Burgh and eventually to Burke.

The 14th Earl, Ulick John De Burgh (1802–1874) married the daughter of George Canning in 1825 and his son, Hubert, the last Marquis of Clanricarde took the additional name of Canning. Hubert De Burgh-Canning (1832–1916) is recorded in history as a ruthless landlord who, ‘insisted that all his rents were payable under law at a time when landlords were conceding rent abatements,’ (Spellissey 1999, 384). As an absentee land-lord, he appointed Robert D’Arcy as an agent for the Clanricarde estate who is recorded


15

as such in 1855 (NUIG, online; Spellissey 1999, 382). In the 1870s the estate amounted to over 49,000 acres. Hubert remained in control of his estate until 1915, when an offer was accepted from the Congested Districts Board for the sale of over 46,000 acres of the Clanricarde estate.

Concannon familyOver 3000 acres owned by Edmond John Concannon and Edward Thomas Beytagh, were offered for sale in the Encumbered Estates Court in 1851 (NUIG, online). Much of the land was in the baronies of Clare and Dunkellin in Co. Galway and some of it was on perpetual lease from the Clanricarde estate. It is likely that the townalnd of Roevehagh formed part of these lands in Dunkellin. By the time of Griffith’s Valuation, the Concan-nons land which had been on perpetual lease from the Clanricarde Estate, had passed to James Thorngate.

The Thorngate familyThe Thorngates were originally from Gosport in England (NUIG, online). According to the Griffith’s Valuation, James Thorngate and his brothers bought landed estates from the Blakes and Blake Forsters in Counties Mayo and Galway respectively and James himself owned land in County Roscommon. The Thorngates also bought a portion of the estates of Edmond Concannon in the barony of Dunkellin (ibid). James Thorngate’s greatest purchase was the Castle Ffrench estate in 1851, where he lived until the 1860s. It is likely that Thorngate lived here whilst he presided over the land at Roevehagh, due to the fact that it did not have an estate house. The estate was sold, after Thorngate’s death, to James Crooke, for whom Daniel Churcher acted as agent. William E. Churcher and George Churcher of Southampton were the trustees of the estate of William Thorngate and much of the Thorngate estate appears to have been in Churcher possession by the 1870s.

Griffith valuation of tenementsJames Thorngate is recorded as being the ‘immediate lessor’ of plot 1 and 2 covering the whole townland of Roevehagh. This does not necessarily mean that he owned it per se, so it is still possible that it was on perpetual lease from the Clanricarde Estate at this time. Plot 1 is divided into sub-plots ‘a’ to ‘t’ which are all located in the village of Roevehagh as it is depicted on the 1838 OS map. Plot 2 represents the R. C. church and its associated plot. The three structures under investigation are likely to have been located on marginal land and it is depicted as rock outcrop and rough grazing. None of the structures are depicted, named or assigned a plot number on the Griffith Valuation map. It is therefore likely, given that they have no plot number on the Griffith Valuation map, that they had bee abandoned before the valuation took place in 1856. Therefore, the subsequent Census returns are likely to convey little additional information regarding the clachan settlement at Roevehagh.


16

The total land leased by James Thorngate in Roevehagh was 679 acres valued at £152 per annum. The buildings were valued at £39 and the total valuation of the townland was £185. The rateable value per acre in decimal would be £0.22. This can be compared to the value of land in other townlands such as nearby Lavally which was £0.38 per acre and Moyveela which was £0.49 per acre. This would indicate that the land at Roevehagh was on average worth half that of Land in Lavally and Moyveela at the time. This comparison in rateable valuation confirms that the land in Roevehagh was of a poorer quality and marginal as depicted on the 1838 Ordnance Survey map.


17

4 Cartographic analysis

First edition Ordnance Survey map 1838The first edition ordnance survey map of the area marks a building at the location of Structure 1. It is located just to the north of a farm track which leads back towards the relatively extensive village of Roevehagh which spread out either side of the north/south routeway. The building is located on the boundary between large open fields and an ir-regular area of rough pasture which probably corresponds with the limits of the karstic limestone pavement or outcropping. The building is located half way between the village of Roevehagh and a smaller collection of houses to the east in the townland of Fahy-mactibbot. To the south, the Dunkellin turlough is illustrated like a lake interrupting the westward flow of the Dunkellin River. Structures 2 and 3 are not shown on the map. To the north of the location of Structure 3 a very irregularly shaped open field is surrounded by areas of rougher ground indicative of outcropping bedrock.

Griffith Valuation map 1857The Griffith Valuation map is essentially an annotated version of the Ordnance Survey first edition map, however the accompanying valuation records indicate the landlord, occupier, description of tenement, area of land leased and rateable valuation of land and buildings. The three structures are not shown on the map, perhaps indicating that they had been abandoned by this time.

The townland of Roevehagh is located in the parish of Killeely and in the barony of Dunkellin. James Thorngate is recorded as being the ‘immediate lessor’ of plot 1 and 2 which covers the whole townland. This does not necessarily mean that he owned it per se, so it is still possible that it was on perpetual lease from the Clanricarde Estate at this time. Plot 1 is divided into sub-plots ‘a’ to ‘t’ which are all located in the village of Roevehagh as it is depicted on the 1838 Ordnance Survey map. Plot 2 represents the R. C. church and associated plot. The land covering the area three structures is likely to be marginal land and is depicted as rock outcrop and rough grazing. The three structures are not depicted, named or assigned separate plot numbers on the Griffith Valuation map. It is likely, given that the structures are not depicted and have no plot number on the Griffith Valuation map, that they had been abandoned before the valuation took place in 1856.

The Griffith Valuation confirms that all of the settlement in Roevehagh was confined to the village which had developed along the main road c. 500 m to the south-west of the three structures. The immediate lessor, James Thorngate leased a house, offices and land to 17 tenant farmers, a house to another and a house and forge to the local blacksmith. The R.C. chapel and associated ground to the north-west is depicted as Plot 2. The aver-age size of the farm holdings was c. 8–9 acres which would indicate very small farms, probably of a subsistence nature.


18

25 inch Ordnance Survey map 1895The landscape portrayed on the 25 inch ordnance survey map from 1893 has been radi-cally altered since the first edition map of 1838. The large irregular shaped fields accessed by the farm trackway south of Structure 1 have been rationalised. The trackway has been extended and fields have been laid out in relatively regular fashion either side of the track-way. In some cases the larger fields have been subdivided. The Dunkellin River has been canalised and the turlough has been subdivided into regular fields and are marked as be-ing liable to flooding. The large irregular shaped area, marked as rock outcropping on the sides of a gently sloping hill, to the north east of Roevehagh village has been completely reworked with long strip fields running east/west from the north/south routeway to the townland boundary with Fahymactibbot. The earlier irregular field boundaries have been destroyed or have been incorporated into the later regular field system. Structure 1 is not shown as a building on this map but two of its walls can be recognised as forming a very angular field boundary. This would indicate that Structure 1 was in a ruined and roof-less state and that Structures 2 and 3 were so completely dilapidated that they were not surveyed. The established village of Roevehagh itself has diminished somewhat in size, highlighting the general population decline of the post-famine period.

Second edition Ordnance Survey map 1929Only the outline of Structure 1 is shown again on the second edition ordnance survey map which dates to 1929 which indicates that it was roofless. A foot path is shown running east/west just to the north of it. The footpath traverses the rough ground and links the small concentration of buildings in Fahymactibbot townland with the north/south road just to the north of Roevehagh. A number of small sub-circular field boundaries which appear to be linked with buildings have been introduced along the townland boundary. Across the area, small quarries can be seen, shown as outcropping circular and oval areas, interrupting the previously uniform strip fields marked on the 25 inch ordnance survey map. The rock known locally as the ‘cuckoo rock’ may also be represented on the map.

Cartographic summaryStructure 1 is discernible in some shape or form on all the Ordnance Survey map edi-tions, whereas Structure 2 and 3 do not appear to be depicted. This may indicate that Structures 2 and 3 had long since been abandoned by the time the 1838 Ordnance Survey map was surveyed. Structure 1 is depicted as a roofed structure on this map which may indicate, but cannot confirm, that it was still in use. None of the Structures 1–3 were de-picted or included in the plot numbers of the Griffith Valuation of 1857 confirming that they had most likely been abandoned at this stage. The subsequent Ordnance Survey map editions only depict the outline of Structure 1 indicating that it was a roofless ruin when surveyed. These findings would suggest that these dispersed structures at Roevehagh were abandoned during the post-famine years of the late 1840s and 1850s. The occupiers may

144485

144485

144635

144635

2191

82

2191

82

2194

22

2194

22

Structure 1

Structure 2

Structure 3

CPO line Surveyed field boundaries0 100 m

±


19

Figure6: DGPSsurveyofthefieldsystems�


20

have been evicted before the Encumbered Estates Act was passed in 1848. It is possible that they were forced to reside with an associated family in the established village of Ro-evehagh c. 500 m to south-west. Lack of detailed information about individual estates makes it difficult to pinpoint the exact chain of events which occurred in each townland.

Plate2: LookingnorthatthesouthernsidewallofStructure1withthewesternhalfofStructure2vis-ibleinthebackground�


21

5 DescriptionThe remains of three structures, associated boundary walls and open areas were identified within the footprint of the road project, in an area which was covered in hazel and black-thorn trees and underlain by surface limestone bedrock (Fig 6). The structures were split between two areas with Structure 1 and Structure 2 forming a southern group. Structure 3 was located approximately 50 m to the north. The southern group consisted of two structures and a back yard. Structure 1 was located to the south and was aligned roughly east/west. Structure 2 was located just to the north of Structure 1 and was aligned roughly north/south and roughly perpendicular to Struc-ture 1. A small yard or haggard was located in front of both structures. The yard was partly defined by a stone field wall to the east and by a collapsed field wall to the north. The yard also appeared to be defined and incorporated into a natural depression. Struc-ture 2 was constructed into the side of this natural depression. The ground surface on the interior of the building is substantially lower then the ground surface on the exterior to the west, south and north but is similar to that encountered in the yard to the east.

Structure 1This was a rectangular shaped vernacular cottage with curved external corners with maxi-mum external dimensions of 9.25 m east/west and 4.5 m north/south (Plate 2) (Fig 7). It had a pair of opposing doors in the eastern half of the north and south side walls. The southern doorway was slightly wider then its northern counterpart. There was also pos-sible evidence for a window ope in the eastern gable wall. The western half of the build-ing was filled with rounded field clearance stones. Rubble wall collapse was noted in the north eastern, inner corner of the building.

The walls were up to 1 m wide at the base and tapered inwards towards the top of the walls so that the width of the walls at their maximum upstanding heights varied from 0.60 – 0.70 m. They were constructed using uncoursed sub-rectangular limestone blocks which measured on average 0.40 – 0.55 m in length, 0.20 m in height 0.30 m in width. The blocks had a single roughly squared or smooth face which was aligned to form the outer and inner wall faces. A rough, smaller, stone-core was used to fill the space between the two lines of larger facing stones. The wall faces also included smaller pining stones. The walls survived to a maximum external height of 1.65 m. The four external corners of the building were curved which was achieved by using sector-shaped stones to form the curve. The internal corners of the building were all 90 degree angles.

The southern doorway was located 2 m from the south eastern corner of the building. The door frame was constructed by using large well shaped limestone blocks which were larger towards the base of the wall (Plate 3). The side walls were 0.85 m wide and formed a 0.90 m wide gap or entrance. The side stones supported a large limestone lintel which was set at a height of 1.4 m from the top of the threshold stone. The threshold stone spanned the entrance but was set back 0.25 m from the inner corners of the side walls and extended

Stru

ctur

e 1

Stru

ctur

e 2

Sout

hern

Doo

rway

Tren

ch 1

Tren

ch 2

Wal

lC

olla

pse

Nor

ther

nD

oorw

ay

Rub

ble

Tren

ch 3

Poss

ible

line

of w

all

Fiel

d C

lear

ance

Ston

es

Win

dow

Ope

0.75

4.0

5.3

4.40

9.200.

86

0.80

1445

98

1445

98

1446

08

1446

08

219277

219277

219284

219284

Fiel

dC

lear

ance

Ston

es

Tren

chFi

eld

boun

dary

05

m

±iSSUe 8: eachtRa JoURnal - iSSn 2009-2237 Final aRchaeological excavation RepoRt

22

Figu

re7

:Pl

ano

fStr

uctu

re1

and

2a

lso

show

ing

the

loca

tion

ofth

eex

cava

ted

tren

ches

�


23

beyond the outer corners. The door opening was blocked with a single leaf loose random rubble wall aligned with the outside face of the buildings southern wall.

The northern doorway did not survive to its full height and prior to the excavation of trench 2 was not clearly identifiable. The doorway presented as a 0.75 m wide gap in the northern side wall and was located opposite the southern doorway. The width of the walls either side of the doorway was 0.85 m. A 0.30 m wide stone base which consisted of 5 stones was identified across the entrance, 0.25 m from the southern corners of the side walls. The flat stone base was set into the underlying natural gravel which appeared to form the base for the remainder of the doorway. The flat stone base may have acted to support a threshold stone or else merely defined the entranceway.

The eastern gable wall bulged inwards and was partly collapsed. The wall may have collapsed and started to bulge inwards at a point of weakness due to the insertion of a window ope. Some of the remaining stones could be viewed as side or jamb stones and hint at the presence of a window. The wall has also been badly disturbed by tree and ivy growth which may also account for the collapse.

A field clearance cairn fills the western 2/3 of the interior of Structure 1. The clearance cairn was composed of rounded limestone which was smaller then the stones used in the construction of the walls. The western gable of the building is now composed of a mix of the original wall stones and the smaller field clearance stones. The north-west and south-west corners of the buildings survive to a height of approximately 1.6 m and are composed of the original wall stones. A clear stepped division between the rounded field clearance stone which fills the building and the original wall stones can be seen and runs from

Plate3: LookingsouthatthesoutherndoorwayinStructure1�


24

Plate4: LookingeastatthewesterngablewallofStructure1�Theoriginalwallhasbeenreplacedbyfieldclearancestonetowardsthecentreofthewall�

Plate5: Lookingwestatthefieldclearancecairnandflue-likefeatureintheinteriorofStructure1�


25

the top of both corners of the building towards the base of the wall at its centre (Plate 4). The field clearance stone also fills the gap between Structure 1 and Structure 2 and spill across the western half of the northern wall of Stucture 1. The clearance cairn slopes downwards from its maximum height along the western gable wall towards the centre of the building. Just to the west of the southern entrance a small flue like feature was noted set into the field clearance cairn (Plate 5). Side stones were set against the southern wall of the building supporting a lintel stone which projected northwards and rested on another set of side stones producing a 0.40 m wide flue like gap backing into the mass of the field clearance cairn.

Structure 2This was a rectangular shaped vernacular building with rounded external corners. It lay just to the north of Structure 1 and had an approximate north/south alignment (Fig 7). It had a squarer ground plan then Structure 1 and measured 4 m x 5.3 m internally. The eastern side wall was not readily identifiable prior to the initial scrub clearance and was only positively identified after the excavation of Trench 3. No entranceway was identified but it must have been located in the eastern side wall as no door opening was identified in the north, west or south wall. A single blocked up window ope was noted in the western side wall (Plate 6).

Plate6: LookingatthewesternwallofStructure2�Notetheblockedupwindowope�


26

The walls of Structure 2 were of similar construction to Structure 1 and had rounded external corners and square internal corners. The south eastern corner of the building was covered with the overspill form the field clearance cairn which filled Structure 1 and the rubble collapse from its own eastern and southern walls (Plate 7). The north, west and south walls of Structure 2 survived to a uniform height of 1.7 m when measured internally.

Plate7: LookingtowardsthesouthwestcornerofStructure2�Notetherubblecoveringthelineofthenonextanteasternwall�

Plate8: LookingnorthatStructure3whichisbuiltintothegroundonitswesternside�


27

The walls survived to a height of 1 m when measured externally demonstrat-ing that the building was built into the sides of a natural hollow or depression.

A blocked up tapered window ope was located in the western side wall 1.3 m from the north western corner of the building. The width of the opening at its base was 0.75 m and it was located 0.70 m from the base of the wall inter-nally. The sides of the opening tapered inwards and its width at the surviv-ing height of the wall was 0.55 m. The opening was blocked fully to the entire width of the wall with small uncoursed limestone blocks.

The southern gable wall of Struc-ture 2 lay 0.25 m from the north-west corner of Structure 1. The two struc-tures are roughly perpendicular to each other. The southern gable wall bulges inward possibly as a result of collapse from the northern wall of Structure 1 and also possibly due to pressure form the field clearance cairn contained within Structure 1. A short length of a single leaf dry stone wall runs north from northern wall of Structure 2 and joins a field boundary wall which runs approximately east/west.

Structure 3This was also a rectangular vernacular cottage with opposing doorways and an external yard to the north (Plate 8) (Fig 8). The structure was aligned east/west and had internal dimensions of 7.9 m x 3.9 m. The western gable of the structure was set into the sides of a natural hollow or depression and the small yard was bounded by the relatively steeply sloping sides of the same hollow.

The walls of Structure 3 were of similar construction to Structure 1 and 2 and had rounded external corners and square internal corners. The two opposing doorways were only identified after the scrub clearance and after comparisons had been drawn with Structure 1. The excavation of trenches 4 and 5 resolved the dimensions and form of the door openings. The southern doorway similar to Structure 1 was slightly larger then its northern counterpart. The southern doorway was located 2.10 m from the south-east cor-ner of the building and measured 0.8 m in width. Three large smooth stone slabs defined the threshold (Plate 9). These were aligned with the width of the buildings walls, unlike

Plate9: LookingnorthatthethresholdstonesinthesoutherndoorwayofStructure3whichwererevealedintrench4�

0.95 7.

9

4.0

1.00

0.75

4.0

9.20

1446

05

1446

05

1446

15

1446

15

219334

219334

219340

219340

Stru

ctur

e 3

Rub

ble

Rub

bleR

ubbl

eR

ubbl

eTr

ench

5

Nor

ther

nD

oorw

ay

Sout

hern

Doo

rway

Tren

ch 4

Rub

ble

Boul

ders

Poss

ible

Win

dow

Lint

el

CP

O li

neTr

ench

05

m

±iSSUe 8: eachtRa JoURnal - iSSn 2009-2237 Final aRchaeological excavation RepoRt

28

Figu

re8

:Pl

ano

fStr

uctu

re3

als

osh

owin

gth

elo

catio

nof

the

exca

vate

dtr

ench

es�


29

the single threshold slab identified in the southern doorway in Structure 1. The northern doorway presented as a simple 0.7 m wide entrance gap in the north wall located directly opposite the southern doorway.

The eastern gable wall bulged inwards and collapsed towards the centre which may have occurred due to a weakness caused by the position of a window ope, however no direct evidence of an opening was identified. A massive boulder over 1 m in length and 0.75 m high forms the internal base of the northern wall just to the east of the north-west corner of the building. The upper edge of the boulder may have formed the lower sill stone of a window opening which is suggested by a possible side stone however there was not enough surviving evidence for a definite identification.

Two short lengths of dry stone wall radiate from the building to join a natural bank which taken together form a small back yard or haggard which was accessible through the northern doorway. Four areas of rubble collapse were visible on the interior after the scrub and tree clearance and another was noted in the angle between the northern wall and the field boundary running north from it.


30

6 ExcavationFive trenches were excavated by hand in an effort to recover some dating evidence (in the form of an artefactual assemblage) for the construction and use of the structures (Figs 7 and 8). The excavated soil was sieved in a further effort to uncover some datable evidence. Very little in the way of an assemblage was retrieved. However, the location of the trench-es was also chosen to clarify some of the construction elements of the three structures and in particular the trenches were targeted at the potential doorways in order to reveal their original layout. Trenches 1 and 2 were excavated across the doorways in Structure 1, trench 3 was excavated across the full width of Structure 2 and trenches 4 and 5 were excavated across the doorways in Structure 3.

Trench 1Trench 1 was excavated against the southern doorway of Structure 1 and the opening to the flue like feature set into the field clearance cairn (Plate 10). The trench measured 2 m x 1 m and extended into the doorway by 0.25 m to meet the single off set threshold stone. The topsoil was a humic rich silty clay which contained a dense root network. The topsoil was 0.2 m deep and overlay the natural subsoil which was a light grey sandy gravel. Some animal bone and one dark green glass fragment was recovered from the topsoil.

Trench 2Trench 2 was excavated across the northern doorway of Structure 1 and straddled the interior and exterior of the building (Plate 11). The trench measured 2.2 m x 1.25 m and revealed the presence of a 0.75 m entrance gap in the northern wall directly opposite the southern doorway. The humic rich topsoil was 0.2 m deep and contained a dense root net-work. The underlying subsoil on the interior was a grey sandy gravel and on the exterior was grey/brown sandy gravel.

Trench 3Trench 3 was excavated across the interior of Structure 2, from the western wall, across the foundations of the eastern wall and extending into the external yard (Plate 12). The trench was 6 m long and 1 m wide. No evidence for a footing or plinth for either wall was revealed nor was there evidence for a construction trench. This suggests that the walls were built directly on top of the underlying subsoil which varies between a light grey and a grey/brown sandy gravel. The dark brown humic rich topsoil contained a dense root network and had a depth of 0.20 m close to both walls and reached a depth of 0.30 m towards the centre of the trench.


31

Trench 4Trench 4 was excavated across the southern doorway in Structure 3 and extended into the interior of the building and beyond the doorway to the south (Plate 9). The trench meas-ured 4 m x 1 m and revealed the 0.8 m wide doorway in the southern wall of House 3. The dark brown humic rich topsoil contained a dense root network and was 0.15 m deep. The threshold contained three large slabs which were aligned with the buildings walls. The stones were set into the underlying subsoil which was orange, marly, silty clay. One glass fragment was recovered from the trench.

Plate10:Lookingwestacrosstrench1whichwaslocatedagainstthesoutherndoorwayandtheflue-likefeaturessetintothesiteclearancecairnontheinteriorofStructure1�


32

Trench 5Trench 5 was excavated across the possible location of a northern doorway (Plate 13). The trench measured 1.8 m x 0.95 m and straddled the exterior and interior of the building. A 0.7 m wide entrance gap located opposite the southern doorway was revealed in the northern wall of the building. The dark brown humic rich topsoil was 0.15m deep and the underlying subsoil was the same orange, marly, silty clay noted in trench 4.

Plate11: Lookingsouthacrosstrench3whichrevealedthenortherndoorwayinStructure1�


33

Plate13:Lookingnorthacrosstrench5whichrevealedthenortherndoorwayofStructure3�

Plate12:Lookingeastalongtrench3whichwasexcavatedfromtheinteriorfaceofthewesternwallofStruc-ture2andacrosstheremainsoftheeasternwall�


34

7 ConclusionsThree vernacular buildings and a series of field boundaries have been identified and re-corded on a south facing hillside in Roevehagh townland. The structures were not de-picted or included in the plot numbers of the Griffith Valuation of 1857 confirming that they had most likely been abandoned at this stage. The subsequent Ordnance Survey map editions only depict the outline of Structure 1 indicating that it was a roofless ruin when surveyed. These findings would suggest that the building group at Roevehagh was abandoned during the post-famine years of the late 1840s and 1850s.

Structure 1 and 3 were very similar in plan with a long rectangular shape, no internal divisions and opposing doors in the north and south side walls. The northern door in both cases was not as large as its southern counterpart and had no threshold stones and appears to be of secondary importance. This arrangement of rectangular direct entry houses with opposing doors is particular to the west of Ireland and would be seen as early in the sequence of vernacular house design. The rounded external corners of the three houses may hark back to earlier circular or oval house designs. There was no evidence for the type of roof structure utilised at any of the three houses however the rounded exter-nal corners would suggest that hipped roofs may have been employed. The hipped roof was used specifically in Connacht before the gable ended house became more dominant. There was no evidence from the excavated trenches about the nature of the internal floors. No cobbling was observed and presumably either clay or gravel floors were utilised.

The layout of both building groups was similar. In both cases a small natural hollow was partly reinforced by stone field boundaries and acted as a small yard. The yard was accessed from the northern doorway of Structure 1 and 3 and from the eastern doorway in Structure 2. There was no evidence for any other outbuildings or sheds surrounding the small yards. There was no lane or road evident connecting Structure 3 with Structures 1 and 2.

Structure 1 is the only one of the surveyed houses to be marked on any edition of the Ordnance Survey maps for the area. The first edition Ordnance Survey six inch map shows Structure 1 as a rectangular building with only one other building visible 80 m to the east. The excavated trenches did not reveal an artefactual assemblage which could be used to ascertain the date of construction of the buildings. A number of green glass fragments and some non-descript earthenware pottery were recovered from the topsoil.

The survey confirmed that the identified field systems belong to two phases. The parallel boundaries running east/west correspond to the strip field systems imposed on the landscape as a result of the move away from a rundale agricultural system at the end of the nineteenth century and first recorded on the 25 inch Ordnance Survey map dat-ing to 1898. The curving irregular field boundaries which bisect the linear pattern of the later system correspond with the earlier field system noted on the first edition Ordnance Survey maps. The curving boundaries recorded in the survey outline a small oasis of good pasture within an open area of poor rock outcropping. The open area marked on the first


35

edition maps may correspond to the outfield element of the rundale field system centred on the two clachans at Roevehagh and Fahymactibbot respectively.

On the basis of construction details Stuctures 1 and 3 would appear to be contempo-rary and were constructed prior to the survey for the first edition Ordnance Survey map. The rounded external corners and possible hipped roofs combined with the opposing doors and lack of internal division mark them out as been early nineteenth century possi-bly eighteenth century cottages. The cottages may have been used as shelter for both fami-lies and their livestock. Structure 2 retains the rounded external corners of the other two houses but is squarer in plan and would have had a single doorway. It is likely to have been an outhouse or shed associated with Structure 1. This association of cottage and shed is common and survives throughout Ireland – the shed or scioból is the tool hut and seed store for the small farmer. On dispersed landholdings sheds can be built as single build-ings as well as in association with the home cottage. On the Aran Islands, while many of the older cottages are tiled or slated it is the sheds which still retain their thatched roofs.

From a construction perspective, these structures are reasonably well built and well preserved, so it is possible that they were abandoned by poor tenant farmers who were un-able to pay their rent on this marginal land during the post-famine years of the late 1840s and 1850s. They may have been evicted before the Encumbered Estates Act was passed in 1848. It is possible that they were moved to the larger village of Roevehagh c. 500 m to south-west or even emigrated.

The cottages are located on high ground mid way between the clachan like settle-ments at Roevehagh to the east and Fahymactibbot to the west. The peripheral nature of the location away from the centres of settlement at Roevehagh and Fahymactibbot might suggest that the inhabitants were also peripheral in a social sense. Do they perhaps repre-sent the dynamics of a communal settlement whereby social disagreements can result in people being excluded or ostracised or indeed self excluded to the peripheries of a group? It is also possible that the houses were in some way connected to the use of the outfield or commonage on the rocky hillside.

The hillside in question shows an expansion in activity on the second edition Ord-nance Survey map. A footpath is shown linking the two settlements of Roevehagh and Fahymactibbot and running just to the north of Structure 1 and 2. This expansion of settlement activity on the hillside in the early twentieth century may be linked to an ap-parent rise in quarrying activity.


36

8 ReferencesAalen, F.H.A 1997 Atlas of the Irish Rural Landscape. Cork University Press.

Fitzpatrick, E 2001 ‘Assembly and inauguration places of the Burkes in late medieval Connacht’, In P. J. Duffy, D. Edwards & E. Fitzpatrick (eds), Gaelic Ireland c.1250 to c. 1650. Land, lordship & settlement, 357–74. Dublin.

Joyce, P W 1867–1913 Names of Irish Places, 3 vols. London & Dublin.

McAfee, P 1998 Stone buildings: conservation, repair, building. O’Brien Press

O’Sullivan, J 2006 Archaeological Heritage. In Galway County Council Environmental Impact Statement for N18 Oranmore to Gort

Spellissy, S. 1999 A History of Galway City & County. Celtic Bookshop, Limerick.

Whelan, K 1995 Introduction to Letters from the Irish highlands of Connemara - by the Blake Family of Renvyle House 1823/1824 (first published by John Murray, London in 1825) - Gibbons publication, Clifden.

www�landedestates�ieLandedEstates/jsp/estate-show�jsp?id=877 Landed Estate Database founded and managed by the Moore Institute, National University of Ireland, Galway. Researched for De Burgh, Concannon and Thorngate. Accessed 20/07/2009.

http://www.landedestates.ieLandedEstates/jsp/estate-show.jsp?id=877

Education

Archaeological Report - Roevehagh 2, Co. Galway (Ireland)